Tuesday, Feb 23, 2010 11:24 AM UTC
The Democratic Party’s deceitful game
They are willing to bravely support any progressive bill as long as there's no chance it can passBy Glenn Greenwald

Democrats perpetrate the same scam over and over on their own supporters, and this illustrates perfectly how it’s played:

.... Rockefeller was willing to be a righteous champion for the public option as long as it had no chance of passing...But now that Democrats are strongly considering the reconciliation process — which will allow passage with only 50 rather than 60 votes and thus enable them to enact a public option — Rockefeller is suddenly “inclined to oppose it” because he doesn’t “think the timing of it is very good” and it’s “too partisan.” What strange excuses for someone to make with regard to a provision that he claimed, a mere five months ago (when he knew it couldn’t pass), was such a moral and policy imperative that he “would not relent” in ensuring its enactment.

The Obama White House did the same thing. As I wrote back in August, the evidence was clear that while the President was publicly claiming that he supported the public option, the White House, in private, was doing everything possible to ensure its exclusion from the final bill (in order not to alienate the health insurance industry by providing competition for it). Yesterday, Obama — while having his aides signal that they would use reconciliation if necessary — finally unveiled his first-ever health care plan as President, and guess what it did not include? The public option, which he spent all year insisting that he favored oh-so-much but sadly could not get enacted: Gosh, I really want the public option, but we just don’t have 60 votes for it; what can I do?. As I documented in my contribution to the NYT forum yesterday, now that there’s a 50-vote mechanism to pass it, his own proposed bill suddenly excludes it.

This is what the Democratic Party does...They’re willing to feign support for anything their voters want just as long as there’s no chance that they can pass it. They won control of Congress in the 2006 midterm elections by pretending they wanted to compel an end to the Iraq War and Bush surveillance and interrogation abuses because they knew they would not actually do so; and indeed, once they were given the majority, the Democratic-controlled Congress continued to fund the war without conditions, to legalize Bush’s eavesdropping program, and to do nothing to stop Bush’s habeas and interrogation abuses (“Gosh, what can we do? We just don’t have 60 votes).

The primary tactic in this game is Villain Rotation. They always have a handful of Democratic Senators announce that they will be the ones to deviate this time from the ostensible party position and impede success, but the designated Villain constantly shifts, so the Party itself can claim it supports these measures while an always-changing handful of their members invariably prevent it. One minute, it’s Jay Rockefeller as the Prime Villain leading the way in protecting Bush surveillance programs and demanding telecom immunity; the next minute, it’s Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer joining hands and “breaking with their party” to ensure Michael Mukasey’s confirmation as Attorney General; then it’s Big Bad Joe Lieberman single-handedly blocking Medicare expansion; then it’s Blanche Lincoln and Jim Webb joining with Lindsey Graham to support the de-funding of civilian trials for Terrorists; and now that they can’t blame Lieberman or Ben Nelson any longer on health care (since they don’t need 60 votes), Jay Rockefeller voluntarily returns to the Villain Role, stepping up to put an end to the pretend-movement among Senate Democrats to enact the public option via reconciliation.

We have had enough of this garbage. We created a landslide. It is time to DEMAND representation.

11. Bullying seems cute now, but would you be happy if a big and tall future GOP Senate majority leader

physically bullied smaller Democratic and Republican senators to get his way?

Does it make you happy to imagine that too?

That is not a political process I want to be a part of, not to mention it is harassment and illegal. It's bad enough to coerce someone with threats that they wont get campaign financing from the party next time, etc., but at least that is in bounds.

Physical intimidation and threats is not part of anything with which I want to be associated.

13. So long as it is for the correct reasons. Are you happy to see them always back off

from the bullies on the Right when the people's needs are at stake, just to appear 'cooperative'? This is politics, it's not for cowards. And if you are on the right side of the issues, you should most definitely do what LBJ with the power entrusted in you by the voters.

35. Politics is tough. If people don't have the stomach to fight for what is right, they should

stay out of politics. I do not consider what LBJ did to be bullying, He fought for what was right and he used the power given to him by the people to do so.

And bullying is the hallmark of the Republican party which is why they have made such progress tearing away at the fabric of this country and the only way to stop them was with people like LBJ, who did not back off.

There is a difference between not backing down, not compromising on people's rights which no one should ever do, and bullying. If you can't see the difference, I don't know what to say. To defeat Republicans we need fighters. Grayson is an example of a fighter. I don't call his handling of Republicans 'bullying'. I call it 'calling them on their lies'.

43. Physical intimidation is bullying. Justify it however you want. That is what you are supporting. nt

46. I suggest you start lobbying for a formal resolution.

It should condemn LBJ retroactively for his egregious abuse of politicians, and it should affirm that intensive counseling should have been provided for all the trembling, traumatized congressmen he left in his wake.

83. Decisiveness is a requirement in politics. LBJ was decisive and if he had not been

we would still be fighting the battle for Civil Rights for all Americans. Depriving anyone of equal rights is the worst form of bullying, and bullies need to be confronted and totally not tolerated and that is what LBJ did.

People are sick to death of the mealy mouthed excuses we hear from our party no matter how many times we get them elected. What utter nonsense to suggest that Dems should act like Miss Manners. We do not want or need leaders who are afraid to stand up and fight for the people they represent.

The people are sick of excuses, they have heard them all. They want to hear no talk of compromising on SS, Medicare, Medicaid or any talk of connecting SS to the Deficit which is a lie and which most people know by now.

Or any hint no matter how cleverly they think they are phrasing it, of any kind of policy that is even a baby step towards the privatization of SS. We are not stupid, we know the language. The only statements acceptable at this point, are the ones made by Bernie Sanders. He has no problem being clear on these issues. Democrats should have no problems either.

37. stevenleser, good people are losing their homes, livelihoods, jobs, and even their lives....

...every single day while Well-to-Do politicians in Congress are playing games.
If it takes a little pushing & shoving to turn that around,
[font size=3]then Let ME be First in Line.[/font]Fuck Them.
Even the biblical figure know as Jesus finally had to pick up a whip and teach these assholes a lesson.

44. You just justified virtually every bad policy of the last 50 years. Iraq, Vietnam, etc.

91. stevenleser, now you are just flinging bullshit .

And YES.
I WILL be first in line to use the political tactics of LBJ andevery other strong President & Political Party in our historyto protect the lives and livelihoods of Americans.
THAT is how politics WORKS!

Would you accuse the NY Giants of "bullying" the NE Patriots in last year's Superbowl?
That is HOW the game is played.

You are WAAAAAAAAAAAY out of line in this thread, stevenleser.

If you want to climb out of a hole,
first you have to stop digging.

Neville Chamberlain returning from Munich with his agreement where he pledged that being nice to the NAZIs would bring "Peace for our Time."

[font color=firebrick size=3][center]"If we don't fight hard enough for the things we stand for,
at some point we have to recognize that we don't really stand for them."--- Paul Wellstone[/font][/center]
[center][/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center][/font]

95. stevenleser, that post is embarrassing, even for DU3.

It is a wild leap to discredit those here who are advocating for Tough Politicsby equating them to violent bullies responsible for bad policy.

But I'm curious, why did you limit your bogus claim to just the last 50 years?
Since you have descended to making spurious and unsupportable claims in your failed attempt to save face, why not the last 100 years?
Or even better...insist that those here advocating for Tough Politics are responsible for "every bad policy not only the US, but various countries" in the history of THE WORLD because I said SO!!! So THERE!!!

When you were cobbling together this fantasy, did you instinctively feel that limiting it to just every bad policy in the last 50 years would somehow make it more believable?

It would be laughable if it wasn't so pathetic.

It IS a tough world out there, stevenleser.
REAL Working Class People are losing their homes, livelihoods, and lives every day due to our current political situation.
I am prepared to play hardball politics (and more) to change this.

Just stop and walk away with some of your dignity intact.
I believe your original intent was good, but your awareness of Political & Economic REALITY is deeply flawed,
and your "strategy" will only get more good working class people KILLED because it has ZERO chance of effecting ANY significant change in our system.
"They" are NOT going to let go without a fight.

[font color=firebrick size=3][center]"If we don't fight hard enough for the things we stand for,
at some point we have to recognize that we don't really stand for them."--- Paul Wellstone[/font][/center]
[center][/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center][/font]

On Edit:
Look, stevenleser.
You've been here a long time,
and have a history of rational, readable, respectful commentary at DU.
Maybe you've just had a few bad days or something.
Thats OK...happens to the best of us,
but just walk away now.
You aren't helping your credibility here, or in your "discussion" downthread.
Just walk away and have a few beers before the meltdown gets worse.
Really.
----Form one long term DUer to another.

65. Stevenleser, your posts advertise that you debated on Fox News.

Steven Leser, you do a lot of lecturing upthread about what tactics are appropriate in political argument. I think you owe me an explanation, Steve Leser, about why you felt it was appropriate in the other thread to bring up, out of the blue, the topic of racist posts in reference to me.

Steve Leser, you wrote that I am a person who should receive "points" for not using an ethnic slur. Please explain to me why that comment was directed at me.

You lecture others about appropriate political argument, you link to your own political blog in all of your posts, and you have advertised in your DU posts that you debated on FOX News. These behaviors suggest that you have some investment in being perceived as a responsible political debater.

As such, I would think that you would offer me an apology. I would think that you would not want to leave the impression that you both use and defend cheap, low, smear tactics like the one you used on me.

73. It was a low, despicable smear tactic you used, steveleser.

I am still waiting for you to apologize and explain how you ever thought associating my name with racist postings was an appropriate response on this board.

This is not behavior I take lightly, Steve Leser. It disgusts me to see it on DU, whether it is directed at me or someone else. You attempted to smear me and associate me with racism, simply because you disagreed with a recommendation I gave another post.

81. Why not just respond to the question? I was in that thread and saw those

exchanges and it was a vile attempt to smear someone unless you had some reason for what you did there. You have offered no reason and no apology. The decent thing to do would be to apologize. Running from the responsibility is not the way to act. It's possible you confused WMWS with someone else. Why not simply say that if that if that is the case?

85. I explained my remark in that thread quite clearly. I'm not going to explain it dozens of times.

102. If we all put you on ignore we will have a greater chance to win.

Infinitestimally so, but greater nonetheless.

You want us to lose in the same way the friends of a schoolyard bully want others to never stand up to him. You want us to lose in the same way the zero-tolerance schoolmarm wants the bullied kid expelled for fighting when he finally stands up to the bully.

I know and hate your mindset and have ever since I lost to bullies, from the time I was little kid in elementary school all the way through high school. And it was the people like you, stevenleser, people with exactly your "violence is NEVER an option" mindset, who caused me to lose, over and over, until I stopped listening to them.

So, welcome and enjoy the living fuck out of my ignore list, but know I'm not putting you on it because I don't want to hear your words.

14. He's always been on my list of Senators to replace with a real progressive. Never liked him, once

in a while he says the right thing, but he was my Senator and as with most Democrats he had no interest in those who elected him and never responded to them. One of the least accessible elected officials in the Dem Party.

I met him once right before he became a Senator, and was arrogant, self absorbed, and did not impress anyone working for the Party that day. But, he was the candidate so as always we supported him, can't say he returned the favor.

59. Are you serious? We can't vote for a Senator on DU?

If only we had known!

I lived in NY and helped get him elected, and will be back in NY before the New Year and will be working hard to beat him together with all the other Dems I have worked with in the past, during the primaries.

15. Yeah. They had to keep quiet for too long... now it's like an enema bomb going off. nt

21. Who had to keep quiet? No one was quiet, because Democrats care about issues. Are you seriously

criticizing people for standing up for Democratic Principles? Fyi, maybe here on DU a few tried to silence people on important issues, but I can assure no one was silent, all of us were constantly letting those we were supporting know exactly why they were getting that support.

What is this with trying to shut people up not just before elections now, but after also? Do you believe that people should be quiet and just trust politicians? How odd!

A Government FOR the people, BY the people, and OF the people. Unbelievable what you see here lately. Just who is 'they' btw?

17. And it's past time for the PEOPLE to make their opinions known. The Corporate Lobbyists have

not been wasting any time. The election is over, it's time to talk about policies, in fact, we should have been doing so during the election, but then it was 'shhhh, there's an election coming up'.

Just when is a good time for the PEOPLE to have their say? Seems there's always a reason for us to be quiet, while DC is crawling with political operatives and has been throughout the entire process. We won, but defeating opponents is not winning, unless we win on the issues.

23. Absolutely!

Agreed. Now is the time to discuss and make our opinions known.

However posting stuff like this:

"Could it be that, even after a landslide vote, the administration still really isn't all that into having progressive majorities? We have seen this DLC/Third Way/Corporate game before from our party."

Isn't discussing policy. It's trashing our party before it's even had a chance to fuck up. Sabrina, you know I don't try to stifle discussion around here but this is not helpful.

36. Thanks, I have the utmost respect for you, Puglover, meant to say that before.

People are concerned and unless it is guaranteed that they could replace Kerry with someone like Mike Capuano, I would worry about losing a seat in the Senate. Capuano would be great, but he lost the primary in his last attempt to run for the Senate.

55. I do think people were making their feelings known. Why else would

both parties deliberately avoid talking about this issue? They were hearing from the voters. Remember, we were told that SS would not be discussed in this election season. An utterly arrogant statement, frankly. They want to make their deals without interference from the people. Too bad.

I just saw some polls on this and an overwhelming majority of people once again, do not want their elected officials to reduce any benefits people receive from SS, Medicare or Medicaid.

But people do need to keep calling their Reps, including Repubs if that's who you are unfortunate enough to have, to let them know we will remember their votes in the next election.

31. It's important to be AWARE of the game,

so as to prevent it from being used again. It's important to make the games explicit, so they can't get away with them.

I am less gloomy now than at any time in recent history, because we had a landslide at the voting booths. We have tremendous opportunity all of a sudden, within our grasp, for REAL change...not just more of the same.

But what's in the news today? Talk of "fiscal cliffs" and compromise, reducing our Senate majority through appointment, moving Michelle Rhee to education, keeping Warren off banking...And the numbers being thrown around in the news re: possible budget deals sound just like they did before this landslide. In other words, we are not getting many...perhaps any...serious signals that the game has changed.

The game should have changed as a result of this election. We hold the cards now. We have to keep letting Democrats know that we are watching them and expect better this time.

50. Now, that's a happy thought!

26. I fear that this is true. There is a great deal of evidence proving this type of behavior

among Centrist DLC/Third Way Democrats in the past.

Thank you for your post. I believe it is imperative that we pressure and petition our Democratic Senators and Independent Senate allies to do the right thing for the Democratic party. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

DLC/Third Way Democrats have been a genuine threat to social, political, and economic progress. A do nothing Blue Dog Congress led us to the slaughter of the 2010 election. We can't let them lead us to the slaughterhouse again.

We should have the 51 votes to reform Senate filibuster rules. If Third Way Democrats do vote with their republican allies to block this reform, or take any type of action to prevent this coming to a vote, it will be very telling. But not unexpected.

33. Hmmm. You're basing your post on a writer's opinion? Really?? nt.

98. Isn't that what we ALL do at DU?

Don't we all base our opinions on what someone else writes?
Even the Talking Heads on TV are reading what someone else writes.
Even our politicians speaking at the podiums of our government are mostly reading what someone else writes.

The very best posters at DU base their opinions on a synthesis of a collection of other writers' opinions.
The very worst posters at DU just make stuff up on their own.

74. Not when you don't advocate action, but foster complacency.

Why would act if they feel as if "the administration still really isn't all that into having progressive majorities"?

Check yourself, dude. I canvased for marijuana for weeks here. It passed handedly. Had I been disillusioned that it couldn't be passed or that the Democrats didn't care about it it simply wouldn't have happened (Tom Udall and John Hickenlooper are decidedly center-right candidates contrasted to my own politics).

Your words do not support your comment here that you are speaking out to get people to write, call, and go to Washington. In fact, I interpret the exact opposite.

78. Oh, Josh, just stop it.

Don't play these accusatory games. I am so weary of seeing this type of crap here, and you should be ashamed to be shoveling it.

Really, how dare you accuse me of "the opposite." You know my posting history, so you know that I constantly exhort people to write and call and even go to Washington; good grief, I made a bunch of posts like that just today. And you saw the thread from two days ago, in which I spoke of the tremendous power and opportunity we possess after this landslide, if we keep the pressure on our representatives to work for us.

I am sick and tired of being sold out. We have a gravely serious, systemic problem of corporate money driving policy in Washington, and, yes, Democrats are complicit. Let me repeat that: Republicans are worse, but Democrats are absolutely complicit. At a certain point we need to be honest about what the problem really is, or we will never solve it.

I absolutely do think there is reluctance on the part of the President and many Democrats in Congress to have a very strong, "untinkerable" progressive majority, for all the reasons that Greenwald outlines and more. I think Democrats need to be clear-eyed about the problem, and that a large part of the reason we are not seeing the level of outcry we desperately need in order to force real change is that people are constantly fed the fantasy that it ISN'T a problem.

The repeated, serious betrayals we have experienced - on austerity/tax cuts for the rich, on political appointments, on the public option, on the police/surveillance state and civil rights - are not a series of flukes, nor are they symptoms of some sort of pathological timidity that has infected only the Democratic side of Washington, and only when they need to push against Bush-style corporate economic, war, or police state policies. No, we have a SYSTEMIC problem of billions of dollars in corporate money flooding our government and making our representatives, including our President, reluctant to represent us on these issues. We need to recognize that serious, serious problem, and we need to deal with it.

Josh, Republicans have been working predictably on behalf of corporate America for a very long time. For decades the Democratic Party was the ONLY thing standing between Americans and vicious, predatory corporate policies. We are seeing frightening changes in our country now, precisely because the infiltration of corporate money into our party is pressuring too many Democrats to abdicate that role. I care desperately about the health of our party, because our country NEEDS our party, and I'm going to keep posting about it as honestly as I can, so that we can FIX it.

That you would accuse me of trying to stifle action is beyond outrageous. The vast majority of my posts on these boards do nothing but CRY OUT for action, and I and others who call for this action are continually lectured by the usual group that we should sit down, shut up, and just be patient.

I am finished with this subthread, Josh. I'm tired, and I really am not interested in hearing why I am wrong and why I am really an evil Republican in disguise.

80. Your posting history is what made my make that comment. Indeed, you feel "sold out."

Your words, not mine. Am I "sold out" because Udall and Hickenlooper are not progressives? Fuck no! We passed marijuana legalization! The first time in the history of the entire human planetary civilization!

I have never seen a post by you advocating contacting the "Third Way" democrats to get progressive legislation passed. Indeed, if I were to make an OP about "Do you think Third Wayers or Republicans will pass liberal policies" I guarantee you that 1) you wouldn't respond and say "yes" nor would you respond and say that it was worth contacting them to try to get those policies passed!

Indeed, you've formed a defeatist position with regards to not only the Obama administration but to Democrats in general (even though, objectively, factually, 1/3rd of them are 100% progressive, and another 1/3rd are moderate and willing to accept progressivism).

Obama is not a leftist, he is a moderate. The only "selling out" he's done is in your mind as far as the right wing has manipulated you and others into believing he's adopted their policies. I've seen enough bullshit right wing fascist lying talking points about how Obama "stole" 600 million from Medicare to fund "Obamacare" to know how their doublespeaking minds work. They don't care about truth and you're being manipulated by their untruths.

How have you been "sold out"? It's simple, you haven't. Indeed, everything Obama has done is consistent with his pre-election rhetoric. Everything with perhaps the exception of foreign policy (though one can make the argument that his foreign policy was interpolatable and falls in line perfectly with polls of the US population).

So please, spare me the outrage, Obama is the most consistent President in US history, he ran a campaign, followed his proposals to the tee (where he had the power to control the outcome) and indeed, totally destroyed anyones rose colored glassed perceptions of him.

You are wrong. You may not be a Republican in disguise (I never said that, btw). But you are certainly, 100%, someone who drives the Republican narrative. You are, inexplicably, and unintentionally, working for them.

Your posts help them more than they hurt them and they 100% do not help drive activists to act against the Republicans.

It's simple. It's really fucking simple. Do you agree or disagree, yes or fucking no, that the Third Way or the Republicans would be open to progressive policies?

96. joshcryer, you are entitled to your opinion,

but your personal attack on woo me with science is unfounded, unwarranted, and untrue,
and well below the minimum standard that should be acceptable on DU.

"But you are certainly, 100%, someone who drives the Republican narrative. You are, inexplicably, and unintentionally, working for them."

Absurd, twisted Nonsense, joshcryer.

Through your tireless efforts to marginalize those those on DU who advocate for the Traditional Democratic Party Values of FDR/LBJ, YOU are doing MUCH MORE to advance the conservative agenda of The Republicans.
YOU are helping The Republicans by moving the Democratic Party To The Political Right.
woo me with science, bu standing for Liberal Values, is working to limit the damage done by you and yours.

I alerted on your post, my 2nd alert ever on DU.

"If you say yes you're a fucking liar."--- joshcryer

Though you employed a rhetorical device, you called woo me with science "a a fucking liar",
and that should not be tolerated, even on DU3.
woo me with science can take some solace in that she has reduced you to this level of bitter and deceptive rhetoric in you failed attempt to save face.

106. I post facts.

It is a fact that anyone who uses right wing rhetoric is driving the right wing narrative. FOSTERING COMPLACENCY is their primary goal and it was what lead to the rise of conservatism in this country.

It is also a fact that if one says that the Third Way or that Republicans will pass progressive legislation they are fucking lying. It's not true. They won't work with us. Fact.

The "trifecta" of the usual suspects who continually post downright untruths about the administration, fear monger has been dwindling quite rapidly. It's only a matter of time before they have their blowout and show their true colors as so many trolls who were banned have done.

And I am not going to sit back and let the bullies run rough shot over me. I have no desire to "play nice" with those who drive the right wing narrative.

107. Oh. I see what your problem is.

You are very confused.
You say you state "facts", but you don't.
You post "opinions".
You insist that somebody is "FOSTERING COMPLACENCY" by question our elected officials and holding them accountable. If you are posting "facts",
then you can easily provide us with links to the scientific studies that support your "opinion".

and What-the-hell-country did you grow up in?
THAT is as democratic and as American and as Democratic Party as it gets.
It is the Republican Party that fosters the type of Lock step allegiance you crave.
You know, the Party YOU aid every day on DU.
(Now watch this. Since YOU have lowered the bar, I can do it too)
And THATS a FACT because I ONLY post FACTS!!!

Here is another one of your problems:

You believe that:
*Fighting for NO CUTS to Social Security or Medicare is Right Wing rhetoric.

*You believe that questioning the War on Drugs and the For Profit Prison Industry is Right Wing rhetoric.

*You believe that protecting the Environment is Right Wing rhetoric.

*You believe that criticizing the continuation and expansion of the Extra-Constitutional Powers of the "Unitary Executive
is a Right Wing rhetoric.

*You believe that asking the President to do MORE for the Poor is Right Wing rhetoric.

*You believe that MANDATES to PURCHASE Insurance from For Profit Corporations is Left Wing rhetoric.

Your problem is CLEAR.
You obviously can't tell your Right from your Left.

I have NEVER seen woo me with science advocate FOR a "Right Wing" Position,
or try to advance the Republican agenda.
I DARE you,
to post a single link to a single post by woo me with science where he/she advocates for a Right Wing position.
[font size=5]I DARE you![/font size=5]Put UP or Shut Up!

However, I see you every day on DU working top protect those who DO advance Republican Policy,
and shield THEM from criticism, protest, questioning, or accountability.

So WHO exactly is helping the Right Wing?

Hey josh,
weren't you that guy that came here sporting a "Che" avatar and claiming to be a "Revolutionary"?
LOL

82. You are wasting your time there, as so many others finally realized, me too

after a long time of attempting to engage. Those kinds of tactics, old as they are, continue to be employed and are now simply boring and not worthy of any response. It's rare for me to stop engaging anyone, but I see the wisdom of no longer wasting time and energy on people who use 'tactics' rather than engage in honest debate.

You have no need to waste your time on those kinds of deceptive tactics. Seems when someone has the gall to speak the truth, they become targets of these kinds of tactics on these forums. If nothing else, it's interesting, kind of scary when it first happens to you and you have no idea why, but after years of seeing the same garbage over and over again, it's simply boring and sad and makes you wonder what the point is supposed to be since it never worked anyhow.

87. Absolutely! I have two blue Senators

and could sound them out on this point! The filibuster is so frustrating to us. Yet the Senators themselves have the experience to see the value in it, so it would be great to hear more from them on it. The M$M is so trivial these days, it hardly even covers a subject like this.

52. A 2010 article? The filibuster reform cannot happen

until the new Congress is convened. There's a lot of other stuff going on and this is not currently under discussion. It will be next year.

Copying and pasting a 2010 Glenn Greenwald screed is not pertinent at this time, especially on this subject. It has nothing to do with what is happening now, nor with anything that will happen when the new Congress is convened in 2013.

63. It has everything to do what is being reported right now. Which is the very reason

why that particular article was chosen. Amazing you missed the reason for it.

Greenwald appears to be one of the most respected commentators on politics in the country now. I doubt he's concerned about the pettiness of a few disgruntled right wingers who have never forgotten his opposition to Bush policies. Nor his refusal to drop that opposition.

He has many Democratic friends in Congress so I imagine they pay close attention to his writings and being that they are all Progressive Dems, they generally agree with him and appreciate his sticking to Democratic Principles. It helps them too when they find themselves up against those who are more than willing to trade those principles or who never held them to begin with.